Ethics aside, Fresolo may run again

I suppose you should give credit to a guy who announces he's going to hang up on you before he does it.

'I'm not going to speak to you,' said former state representative John Fresolo, when I reached him Friday on his cellphone. 'I'm going to hang up on you, OK?'

It wasn't OK by me, of course, so I told him I wanted to discuss his plans to reclaim the seat he lost when he resigned during a House Ethics Committee probe into his, er, ethics. Granted, it was a short investigation.

'I'm going to hang up now,' he said. And true to his word, he did.

Fresolo isn't always so consistent. This spring, he swore up and down that he wouldn't resign until he did, in May, but taxpayers weren't allowed to learn anything about the alleged misconduct. Instead, we were told by these legislative secret squirrels only that the probe involved 'serious violations' of House ethical standards.

But despite resigning in disgrace, Fresolo says he will run next year to reclaim his seat. Because he speaks only to journalists who write fawning profiles of him, he announced his intentions to Rosalie Tirella of InCity Times, after she wrote that he was 'passionate' and 'sexy' and urged him to run. In response, Fresolo wrote that 'I do intend to run next year.'

His declaration came the same day as the special primary election to fill his seat, which cost $33,000 and will result in a Sept. 10run-off between Democrat Daniel Donahue and Republican Carol Claros, which, by the way, will cost another $33,000.

Despite the secrecy of the ethics probe, rumors have circulated that it focused on Fresolo's alleged abuse of his per diem expenses, along with an Anthony Weiner-like episode that involved a young female staffer finding a picture of Fresolo's, er, passionate sexiness on his office computer. The picture was reportedly not meant for the staffer, who was horrified nonetheless, and you can't blame her.

Nor should voters be blamed for assuming that, if Fresolo reclaims his seat, the results of the ethics probe would be made public. How could a disgraced elected official who was essentially forced out of office resume his political career the next year without voters learning what he did wrong?

Apparently it's not so simple. State Rep. Matthew Beaton, a Shrewsbury Republican and a member of the House Ethics Committee, told me last week that, while he can't discuss the Fresolo probe, his resignation effectively closed the inquiry.

'As far as the rules go, there's nothing that says he can't run again,' Beaton noted. But what about making the probe public if Fresolo wins?

'My interpretation of the rules is that it would hit the re-set button,' Beaton said, adding that the decision would ultimately rest with Ethics Committee Chairman Marty Walsh, who didn't return phone calls last week. 'It may not have to be made public. But it's possible the investigation could be re-opened.'

The bottom line? 'This is a very unique situation,' noted Beaton. 'There hasn't been anything like this in quite some time. It's unfortunate. I'd like to see a more open and transparent process. There's obviously a fundamental problem with these rules.'

And there's obviously a fundamen­tal problem with a state rep who abruptly resigns under a cloud and thinks nothing of asking for votes in the next election cycle. But this is the summer of no shame, and Fresolo is likely taking cues from politicians such as Weiner and Eliot Spitzer.

This secretive system badly needs changing. And looking on the bright side, Fresolo's potential return to the state Legislature should make him the poster boy for Ethics Committee rules reform.